politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » DDavis drops sharply in the next CON leader betting following
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » DDavis drops sharply in the next CON leader betting following reports that he might quit
A report in the Telegraph about the frustration that BrexSec DDavis is having with his job has prompted big changes in two betting markets – next CON leader and next Cabinet exit.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
As an aside, it's entertaining to reflect that in olden days such allegations were levelled against the Left by the Right, and now it's all arse about face.
...or for Jeremy Corbyn.
It has to be said that, whether you agree with him or not, it's hard to think of a more politically-inept top Cabinet figure in recent years.
Gove’s time is coming, I suspect he’ll be able to shore up the Leave vote and the Cameroon vote within the PCP.
I suspect a young Cardinal like Raab to be an alternative if Gove doesn’t run.
They may like to remember that the official campaigns were limited to a spend of £7m throughout the campaign.
This, along with Obama's 'back of the queue' intervention was one of the things that swung my vote to Leave. In terms of governments intervening, it certainly wasn't Russian intervention I was worried about.
Her ability to choose people is about equal to her skill in getting the big decision right.
The funny thing is, much of the leave campaign gave me pause for thought and made me consider voting remain.
The official vote leave campaign was disingenuous in places - the 350m claim for example - while the unofficial leave.eu campaign was positively odious.
But they had to be balanced out against nonsense like the 'little Englander' insult and the punishment budget threat.
However, I do think Tony Benn's famous questions to ask to those in power, particularly the last question, "how do we get rid of you?" were what gave me pause for thought.
I took the first opportunity *in my lifetime* to register my discontent with the way things were going. Unfortunately, the only option on the table was the nuclear one.
Had our masters made a greater effort to secure democratic consensus at an earlier stage, we might not be where we are now. Considering how the promise on a referendum on Lisbon was reneged upon, I figured this referendum may be the last chance I'd ever get.
Remainers - be honest - if there was a second referendum and the decision reversed, do you think the people in power would ever allow the question to be put to the British people again?
Then perhaps you understand why I voted the way I voted.
“AlastairMeeks said:
Casino_Royale said:
AlastairMeeks said:
DavidL said:
I have always thought that we need to have a soft Brexit. To do otherwise is to ignore the apparent wishes of a very significant part of our population. Once we are out it will be for future generations to evolve the relationship with the EU.
My guess is that we will drift away over time with less of our trade there, less interest in continental machinations, a mild relief that we don't have those UKIP idiots somehow managing to embarrass us in the most embarrassing Parliament north of Harare and increasing differences in our laws over time. But I could be wrong. We may go the other way and end up being members again in all but name.
The point is that we surely all want a relatively undisruptive Brexit now. That is what the government should be working towards and seeking to build a consensus on. Between the rants we do see glimpses of this, primarily from Mrs May interestingly enough. Here's hoping she can deliver.
Who is this we? The we who voted for a hard anti-immigration Brexit or the we who didn't vote for Brexit at all? You want to betray both groups to achieve your own aspiration.
Could DavidL win, in your eyes?
If he tries to engage with you, and other Remainers, to find a form of Brexit that all can support, he's betraying the referendum and anti-democratic.
If he tacitly endorses hard Brexit, he's criticised for being a hardline Leaver mapping out a divisive vision of Brexit that few Remainers can support, and open to abuse for it.
As far as I can tell, your view is that Leave had the Mark of Cain upon them from May 2016, as soon as their campaign went hard on immigration, and nothing they've been able to say or do since has been, or ever will be, good enough in your eyes.
Leave won on xenophobic lies. That nasty prospectus must be seen through to its conclusion. That has not yet been reached. Those who decided that falling in behind xenophobic lies was justified to achieve Brexit must make their own reckoning with that decision. But seeking to pretend it didn't happen isn't an option.”
You are making an assumption that all those who voted Leave “fell in behind” those particular lies. I don’t think you can make that assumption. Anymore than someone could make an assumption about you that you are a fan of the EU simply because you voted Remain.
It would only bother me if illegality rather than propaganda came to light, and it doesn't seem to have done so, even though UKIP have been Putin's useful idiots.
Off now to the footy. Let's hope for 3:1 to Leicester again, though not too optimistic.
I'm not a big fan of the Harry's Place website, but this was a good post on these kinds of issues: http://hurryupharry.org/2016/06/20/why-i-am-voting-leave-by-professor-alan-johnson/
I disagree, personally - I think the thrust of the democratic critique of the EU has a point, but that even after we leave we're so intertwined with the EU in other ways that we'll hardly be free of it, and anyway the British state is hardly a better beast to hold sovereignty over us (as if it doesn't just react haphazardly to processes and events beyond any democratic control most of the time anyway). But it's a worthwhile conversation to have. It's a terrible shame that the referendum was wasted on 'WW3 versus EU-Nazi superstate!' nonsense rather than a proper discussion of fundamentals, but I guess it never could have been that.
If there had been a vociferous cohort of Leavers at the time expressing dismay at the official campaign's approach, your point would have some force. But there wasn't. The so-called liberal Leavers cowered until the vote was past, then sought to subvert the campaign to their own ends. They have rightly been disregarded.
In all seriousness it does fit him too, doesn't it?
How did we come to this?
Then he got into office and started behaving like a tinpot dictator. He was arrogant, reckless and extremely rude, to the point of being a bully, hidden under a veneer of charm. Because he failed to listen to advice but did only whatever he thought was right, he made some truly disastrous mistakes of which the new exams being rushed in without proper preparation are only the worst.
And I think Corbyn would be very like that too. I don't think it's any coincidence that in private they reportedly get on quite well.
I can fully endorse your last sentence though, albeit for different reasons.
A month ago I would have suggested Priti. Now, maybe Loathsome?
https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2017/11/claims-that-davis-may-resign-are-simply-wrong-who-gains-from-media-briefing-against-him.html
I would also suggest it is Davis who has most support from Tory MPs at the moment and it is the MPs who decide the two leadership candidates to be put to the the membership.
I would not assume, for instance, that all those who vote Labour share the anti-Semitic views of some of their representatives merely because they voted for them and did not “express dismay”. If one were to adopt your approach, perhaps one should.
Vote Leave endorsed Free Trade while Leave.EU and UKIP opposed it.
Vote Leave endorsed controlled immigration while Leave.EU/UKIP opposed immigration.
Vote Leave endorsed maintaining rights, I don't know or care what Leave.EU/UKIP stood on for this issue.
Vote Leave rejected and criticised the disgraceful UKIP Breaking Point poster.
Vote Leave wanted Farage and his ilk excluded from all debates.
If you want to major on what Vote Leave did then fine do that. But then don't bring up the xenophobia of Leave.EU/UKIP which were deliberately excluded and rejected by Vote Leave.
Your only complaint about Vote Leave relating to "xenophobic lies" appears to be the "Turkey joining the EU" campaign - which ignores the fact that Turkey joining the EU was official EU and UK and Turkish policy at the time! Claiming official government policy is what is going to happen is not a "lie".
Young, dynamic leaders e.g. Cameron and Blair take over in opposition when a party is desperate to return to power not when a party has been in power a long time. Then parties almost always pick experienced, competent leaders who can present stability to voters fearful of the alternative.
19/6/16: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36570759
Chris Grayling said: "It's the wrong poster, it was the wrong approach, it's the wrong view."
Micheal Gove: “When I saw that poster I shuddered. I thought it was the wrong thing to do,” he said, adding he was “pro-migration” but wanted proper control on the number of those moving to Britain. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/19/eu-referendum-campaigning-resumes-as-jeremy-corbyn-and-michael-g2/
Vote Leave leaders rejected xenophobia before the votes were cast.
I bring you useful news. If you get a lipstick stain on cashmere, spray it with some WD40 and, hey presto, the stain goes. Follow by a mild wash in cool water and no wringing or putting to dry on a radiator. Just air dry on a towel.
Useful for adulterers, cashmere wearers and those fond of lipstick.
But is there any indication that either a) the EU wants to become more democratic or b) that the mechanism to reform the EU even exists? What would it look like? The whole system is designed to prevent direct democracy, so I assume that placards or riots on the streets would be the only effective means of protest. When no clear mechanism for reform via the ballot box exists I prefer to simply leave.
For the last forty years the direction of travel has been clear, and it has only ever been one way.
There is no such comparison in Europe. Europe is not ran by a government we elect. It is ran by an unelected Commission, the European Council (of which we are only one member and can be outvoted, also elected by national manifestos not EU ones) and the European Parliamentary elections are impotent to enact any serious change.
Within the last decade we've had a Labour government, a Coalition (including a voting reform referendum), a Tory majority and minority government and could potentially have a Corbyn government next. All at the whim of us, the voters.
When has the EU actually been credibly changed by the actions of the voters?
https://twitter.com/anna_soubry/status/931906452532416513
The fact remains that our country is going to be impoverished both economically and in terms of our global influence and standing by Brexit, and its advocates will find that their dream to stop the world and get off is not a viable proposition.
If you want to change our voting system there is a path to do so.
When has the EU had a comparable change at the choice of the electorate rather than the electorate rubber stamping (or being by-passed if they disagree) what the powers that be have already decided?
http://ponyonthetories.blogspot.co.uk/
To be honest, though, the way the EU have responded to Brexit makes me happier every day to have voted Leave. Europe deserves better leadership than the likes of Juncker and Barnier.
You are still ignoring the 2011 referendum, did you vote in it? 13 million voters decided they wanted to keep our current system. Those darn pesky voters getting in the way of what you want, if only we could override them - no wonder you're a fan of the EU!
However the question is the time it would take to do so - ten years or so perhaps?
I think you hit the nail on the head when you point out that while the affordability of repayments has never been better, but the deposit required to get on the housing ladder is historically at its most unaffordable.
In other words the gap between the haves and the have nots will continue to rise, those fortunate enough to have resources - often parental resources - will continue to benefit while those who do not will be left behind.
That means that while your conclusion - a slow adjustment - is the sane one, the angry mob will probably vote in a radical long before that happens.
As I've said on the subject previously, Corbynism is a very middle class rebellion. Mostly university educated Glastonbury types in middle class jobs on middle class salaries whose parents were able to get on the property ladder but they are not, and feel hard done by.
A generation ago they would have turned into natural Conservative voters as they settled down, bought houses, and had families. Instead, they are turning to radical socialism as a panacea for their perceived declining quality of life.
In that respect, they are much like the working class who voted 'leave' - choosing a radical solution to arrest their declining living standards.
Elect Labour and reset the clock. Have a proper national discussion about whether a realistic brexit is possible and/or desirable - without the toxic bollox - and then the country and economy can move forward.
The tories must either wither and die, or reinvent themselves.
Have you seen Diem25, Varoufakis' pan-European party / pressure group? That is what resistance within the EU looks like, that is what the democratic reform movement looks like. It is limited to a few fringe elements waving placards on the street and sitting in circles attending well-meaning meetings at which they say 'something must be done' without having any power to actually do anything.
Meaningful reform can only come if you are prepared to walk away when you don't get it.
Sounds like a great incentive to make Brexit work.
Many of us voted to leave the EU for reasons of governmental accountability and support of global free trade, rather than an inward looking, shrinking and protectionist bloc. For the reasons offered by Michael Gove and Daniel Hannan, not the reasons offered by Nigel Farage.
The so called 'toxic Brexit' you talk of, ie leaving the EU and single market, still seems to have a lot of support and the Tories are also gradually moving towards a FTA with the EU.
https://twitter.com/AidanKerrTweets/status/931860729090756608
https://twitter.com/myviewontopic/status/931919009540341760